Harvey Keitel Movie:

Editorial Review:
First film by director Ridley Scott barely got released in this country in the mid-1970s, but stands up, despite the rather noticeable accents of its stars. That's because Brooklynite Harvey Keitel and Westerner Keith Carradine are playing a pair of officers in Napoleon's army--oops! The plot centers on Carradine insulting Keitel and Keitel demanding vengeance. But every time they get into the middle of one of their duels, war breaks out or something else happens to interrupt. Keitel, however, is too pig-headed to let it drop and dogs Carradine over the course of 20 years. Strong performances otherwise and amazing cinematography, as well as a cast that includes Albert Finney, Edward Fox, and Tom Conti. --Marshall Fine

The Duellists [Region 2] Reviews:
Good movie
2009-11-17 - I first saw this movie in a theater,then when it was on cable,then I bought the VHS tape,now I have it on DVD.
I'm really not that familiar with uniforms or styles of the period,but I take it the films makers made sure they were correct,Harvey Keitel is excellent as the atagonist,and Keith Carradine is also perfect as the target of a maniacs spite and rage.
This movie is well done,the scenery is awesome,and the duels,well thats what makes this movie what it is,exciting,and it keeps you on the edge of your seat.

The Duellists
2009-11-12 - One of the finest movies I've ever seen. Not only is the story fascinating, kind of a Les Miserables theme, but the costuming and scenery were beautiful. The whole movie was like an 18th Century French or Flemish painting.

The theme is dark, but very realistic and believable. Carradine and Keitel are both at their acting peak. Very suspenseful and riveting.

I've loved this movie for many years and gladly recommend it to anyone. This is an outstanding movie of the Napoleonic Age.

I could not love thee half as much loved I not honor more
2009-11-08 - A truly unusual film, both unique and brilliant. It is also one of my personal favorites. The Cinematography helps make the mood of the time but the real story is that of obsession, unrelenting hatred and uncompromising honor. The Napoleonic officer, Feraud [Harvey Keitel] doesn't like his fellow officer, D'Hubert. As a matter of fact, he hates him and won't rest until he's dead. Why? It seems that D'Hubert has...under orders...interfered with Feraud's participation in a previous killing duel.

This sets the scene for the next 15 years. Both men rise in the ranks of Napoleon's Army and Feraud challenges the reluctant D'Hubert to various duels every time he gets the opportunity. Fencing foils, sabres, a two man cavalry charge and, finally, pistols. There are a series of minor to serious wounds, none of which prove fatal. Sometimes Feraud 'wins' and sometimes D'Hubert proves victorious.

Feraud makes D'Hubert's life a nightmare but, once challenged, D'Hubert...sometimes trembling in his boots...never fails to meet the challenge. Honor. There are battles with victories and losses. There is the disastrous retreat from Moscow in which 600,000 men die but both of our duellists survive but with undiminished hatred.

Napoleon is defeated at Waterloo and D'Hubert becomes a Royalist General. The stiffnecked Feraud, however, is condemned to die as a Bonapartist. D'Hubert saves his life, only to face the final, climatic duel. The ending is both brooding and brilliant. A truly memorable film.

Ron Braithwaite, author of novels...'Skull Rack' and 'Hummingbird God'...on the Spanish Conquest of Mexico.

A rational man forced to face a lunatic
2009-06-05 - I'll be brief, since there are already many reviews.

Beautifully filmed, and great acting by Keitel and Carradine. For me, this was the perfect portrayal of a rational man, bound by honor (Carradine), forced to deal with a lunatic (Keitel) obsessed with killing him. Carradine cannot run and must fight, based on the code to which he adheres, but cannot bring himself to kill his opponent when he has no reason to do so.

I'm no expert on fencing, but the swordplay stood out, and had the ring of truth. Not Errol Flynn. Brutal combat.

Definitely worth watching.

A gorgeous authenticity
2009-04-28 - It is mind-boggling to discover that this film was made on a budget of 900K. It carries a strong sense of authenticity (the times and the places). And the filming is genius,.... haunting and beautiful. It's primarily about two very different men. One full of ego and hatred, feeling he has a lot to prove. The other,... resigned to his fate as an army officer, but with no desire to prove anything. But neither will he relinquish his dignity or honor. And the latter is plagued by the former for many years, and places, and wars. At this time in Europe it is all very believable, and it is not overdone or sensationalized. The ending is not what anyone will be expecting, and some may not like it. But it rang true to me. The performances where quite adequate, but this is really a director's film. All things considered, I thought this was a hell of a piece of film-making.